How to Protect Yourself From Obamacare

[we vs us]

Nah.  I want everyone to chip in for the project.  With better avionics I am less likely to crash into your house so it would be good for you to send $ now.  PM me for address etc.  I don't want to spend my money on it.  As Wevsus said, common good.

Eventually the feds will tax my employer to pay for health care and due to the "middle man government" costs, the taxes will be higher than what it costs my employer now.  I will probably get a pay cut to get government funded health care.

The interesting part is that, in country after country, middleman government costs are far lower than the middleman private insurance costs we pay in our country.  Wish I could understand why.

[Conan71]

Some doctors are reluctant to take new Medicare patients. 

I am paying into Medicare now but not receiving benefits.  I consider it to be prepaying some of the premiums.  Figure the time value of that over a career and let me know if it's still less expensive.

I'm not sure what Medicare alone covers but there sure are a lot of TV ads for supplemental insurance.  Fortunately my mom has both but even then it was not easy when the retirement plan changed the private insurance company to find a new doctor. 

When we moved my grandmother to Tulsa 10+ years ago we had trouble finding her an internist and cardiologist who would take it.  We finally had to call in a favor from an old family friend to get her into a heart doc.  I can understand the dilema.  If you can make more off patients who can pay their own way instead of doing break-even work for government reimbursement, I know what I'd take. 

I may be going way O/T here, but I saw something incredibly interesting the other day which contrasts with what doctors consider a losing proposition in dealing with the government.  I dropped in on a friend of mine who is leasing space in a large warehouse builiding from a company who paints gensets for the military.  Basically, the gensets come in and get painted milspec OD green then ship out.  Apparently that's a pretty good gig as I observed at a minimum of $300,000 to $500,000 worth of race cars and assorted engines, equipment, etc. in a part of the building set aside as a race shop.  Maybe the owner of the building is simply that wealthy already, though it seems pandemic that people who contract with the government via consulting, manufacturing, or construction are doing very, very well.

[Red Arrow]

The interesting part is that, in country after country, middleman government costs are far lower than the middleman private insurance costs we pay in our country.  Wish I could understand why.

I wish I could believe it.  The concept would be that the government isn't trying to make a profit.  The other side is that private industry has to be more efficient to be competitive.  I don't have any actual comparison numbers.  Do you?

[we vs us]

I wish I could believe it.  The concept would be that the government isn't trying to make a profit.  The other side is that private industry has to be more efficient to be competitive.  I don't have any actual comparison numbers.  Do you?

It's pretty easy to pull numbers to show that the American system -- and very specifically the private-sector American system -- is far more inefficient than any of the other first world countries you could choose to compare it to.  The Wikipedia page on healthcare in the US has a surprisingly good summary page, and very well cited. In many straightforward metrics -- infant mortality, life expectancy, adult obesity, number of adults insured -- we're lagging far behind other first world countries . . . and when taken in concert with the fact that we pay up to twice as much as other countries for those outcomes, it's pretty obvious how broken our private-sector system is. 




Competition is absolutely laudable, and if deployed well can get you some good outcomes . . . but the numbers show that the way we've constructed the system to compete is an absolute systemic failure at harnessing the benefits of that competition. At the same time, our competitors around the world have just done away with that inefficiency altogether and are paying for it through some form of government insurance.

Sorry it's all wikipedia, but there are some nicely sourced articles and tables in there.

[TheArtist]

  Heard someone from Europe the other day commenting on the US's penchant for health insurance say...

"How is, health insurance, health care?".   

[Red Arrow]

It's pretty easy to pull numbers to show that the American system -- and very specifically the private-sector American system -- is far more inefficient than any of the other first world countries you could choose to compare it to.  The Wikipedia page on healthcare in the US has a surprisingly good summary page, and very well cited. In many straightforward metrics -- infant mortality, life expectancy, adult obesity, number of adults insured -- we're lagging far behind other first world countries . . . and when taken in concert with the fact that we pay up to twice as much as other countries for those outcomes, it's pretty obvious how broken our private-sector system is. 

{Graph deleted}

Competition is absolutely laudable, and if deployed well can get you some good outcomes . . . but the numbers show that the way we've constructed the system to compete is an absolute systemic failure at harnessing the benefits of that competition. At the same time, our competitors around the world have just done away with that inefficiency altogether and are paying for it through some form of government insurance.

Sorry it's all wikipedia, but there are some nicely sourced articles and tables in there.

I'm sure you would like to think the difference is because their plans are run by the government.  I cannot deny the price difference but I think there is more to the difference than the fact that their plans are government run.  We all know the talking points. Take away the exaggerations and there will be some truth.  As (I believe) Tip O'Neill said, a million here, a million there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money. (Or something close to that.)

I do not want price controls.  I remember waiting in line for a half tank of price controlled gas in the 70s.  Turns out there was plenty of gasoline at a higher price.  I would like to know if the insurance companies prohibit sale of medicine at insurance prices to individuals as part of some package.  I use a prescription for dry skin which cause cracks around my finger tips.  I can't find the paperwork at the moment. The retail price was about $10.  WalMart sold it to me for $4.  My insurance statement indicated WalMart was NOT reimbursed for the difference. Long story made short, WalMart would not sell it to me for $4 without going through my insurance.  My insurance required that future purchases go through their mail order pharmacy which at that time charged $5. 

Conspiracy theories are always a fun way to stir things up.  I smell something fishy.  What else goes on that is jacking our prices up?

Before you say we wouldn't have that problem with a government run system, I have to ask do you deal with government contracts?  Preferred vendors, must buy from minority owned firms at a higher price than the competition?  I will not evaluate buying from a minority owned business for this thread except to say it raises prices.  It may be a price society is willing to pay but we should be aware it is costing us cash.

[we vs us]

I'm sure you would like to think the difference is because their plans are run by the government.  I cannot deny the price difference but I think there is more to the difference than the fact that their plans are government run.  We all know the talking points. Take away the exaggerations and there will be some truth.  As (I believe) Tip O'Neill said, a million here, a million there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money. (Or something close to that.)

I do not want price controls.  I remember waiting in line for a half tank of price controlled gas in the 70s.  Turns out there was plenty of gasoline at a higher price.  I would like to know if the insurance companies prohibit sale of medicine at insurance prices to individuals as part of some package.  I use a prescription for dry skin which cause cracks around my finger tips.  I can't find the paperwork at the moment. The retail price was about $10.  WalMart sold it to me for $4.  My insurance statement indicated WalMart was NOT reimbursed for the difference. Long story made short, WalMart would not sell it to me for $4 without going through my insurance.  My insurance required that future purchases go through their mail order pharmacy which at that time charged $5. 

Conspiracy theories are always a fun way to stir things up.  I smell something fishy.  What else goes on that is jacking our prices up?

Before you say we wouldn't have that problem with a government run system, I have to ask do you deal with government contracts?  Preferred vendors, must buy from minority owned firms at a higher price than the competition?  I will not evaluate buying from a minority owned business for this thread except to say it raises prices.  It may be a price society is willing to pay but we should be aware it is costing us cash.

If there was a free market alternative that could guarantee outcomes that would put us on top again while doing it for cheaper I'd be all for it.  There's just simply no evidence that our system as it exists provides us with those benefits. To the contrary, costs keep growing and growing.  At the same time, there are numerous examples around the world of competitive entrepreneurial systems doing it better for cheap.  The common thread is that it's run in some form or fashion through the government.  The paths aren't always the same but government involving itself heavily on behalf of its citizens is.

It's a pretty easy conclusion if your ideology doesn't disqualify it out of hand.  The government can do some things better than private enterprise.   Turns out healthcare is one of them. 

[Red Arrow]

It's a pretty easy conclusion if your ideology doesn't disqualify it out of hand.  The government can do some things better than private enterprise.   Turns out healthcare is one of them. 

I hate to spin this back on you but I will. It's also a pretty easy conclusion that government run healthcare is the way to go if your ideology supports the idea that government run programs are better than private ones.

I don't believe that the healthcare industry should be completely without government interference regulation.  I just prefer that a government run program be the last choice.  It may ultimately be the final choice but let's explore other options first.  I agree that our current system is not working as is.

I do agree that the only way to reduce the cost of healthcare to the individual is to get healthy people to pay into the system.  Can you imagine the cost of car insurance if the only drivers they insured always had wrecks?  How about if you wrecked your car and then tried to buy insurance to fix it (pre-existing condition)?  Forcing  healthy people into the system obviously has some issues.  I do not pretend to have an easy solution.

[we vs us]

I hate to spin this back on you but I will. It's also a pretty easy conclusion that government run healthcare is the way to go if your ideology supports the idea that government run programs are better than private ones.

I don't believe that the healthcare industry should be completely without government interference regulation.  I just prefer that a government run program be the last choice.  It may ultimately be the final choice but let's explore other options first.  I agree that our current system is not working as is.

I do agree that the only way to reduce the cost of healthcare to the individual is to get healthy people to pay into the system.  Can you imagine the cost of car insurance if the only drivers they insured always had wrecks?  How about if you wrecked your car and then tried to buy insurance to fix it (pre-existing condition)?  Forcing  healthy people into the system obviously has some issues.  I do not pretend to have an easy solution.

Just for the record I don't think that government is the best solution in every case for every problem.  I think there are plenty of places that market competition will generate the best results, and I'm willing at least to talk over the implications of privatizing/marketizing any given problem.  But in places where the evidence points strongly in the direction of a government solution I'm more than happy to bring its specific powers to bear.  The point isn't HOW we solve a problem, it's that we solve it best.  If government can do that, so be it.  For healthcare, IMO, most every sign points in that direction.

But I think we agree on a lot of things -- first of which is the lack of easy solution. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

If you remember price controls, Red, then you must also remember that was another Republican cluster.  (Can you spell Tricky Dick...)

And he left Jerald Ford and Jimmy Carter the mess to try to clean up.  Yeah,...that was easy!  

One of the more recent Republican innovations was the $550 billion Medicare part D giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry.

As far as the rest of our medical;  wouldn't it be nice if everyone got the same treatment as Mrs. Giffords.  It is not at all that I begrudge her the treatment she is receiving.  It IS that I begrudge the fact that every citizen in this country doesn't receive the same preferential treatment.

Corollary question;  does anyone believe that any citizen in this country does NOT deserve the same treatment as Mrs. Giffords?  (Does anyone have the nerve to say so?)

And if so, exactly why would that be??

And if everyone believes all citizens should be treated equally, then how could they possibly argue against efforts to fix the obviously broken system?  And no, saying THIS health bill is the wrong bill is just pure crap.  There have been decades of opportunities to work on fixing this broken mess with NO finger lifted.  I submit we do something (like we just did) and then if it doesn't work, modify and re-engage.  Repeal is the "no answer" answer.  The John Boner generation listened to way too much "just say no" during the formative years (George Bush's nickname for the Republican leader - not mine.)

[Red Arrow]

If you remember price controls, Red, then you must also remember that was another Republican cluster.  (Can you spell Tricky Dick...)

I remember that Nixon brought us the 55 MPH speed limit.  My highway gas mileage went down compared to 65 MPH.  He also kept me from going to Viet Nam.  As bad as Nixon was, I would still vote for him over Humphry or McGovern.

Gerald Ford had a mess to clean up. I think he got the healing process started.  The country was fed up with Republicans and decided anyone would be better than a Republican.  We got Jimmy Carter. 

[Red Arrow]

And if everyone believes all citizens should be treated equally, then how could they possibly argue against efforts to fix the obviously broken system?  And no, saying THIS health bill is the wrong bill is just pure crap.  There have been decades of opportunities to work on fixing this broken mess with NO finger lifted.  I submit we do something (like we just did) and then if it doesn't work, modify and re-engage.  Repeal is the "no answer" answer.  The John Boner generation listened to way too much "just say no" during the formative years (George Bush's nickname for the Republican leader - not mine.)

I don't remember anyone saying the existing system is fine the way it is.  It's a matter of opinion whether or not the existing bill is "the answer".  It has some good provisions (that will cost a ton of $) but sometimes you rebuild, sometimes you replace.  Put some slime in a leaky tire or get a new tire.  Nancy Pelosi said we had to pass the bill to find out what's in it.  My guess is that no one still knows all the crap that's in the existing bill.  I also believe there is no chance the repeal will get past the Senate.

[heironymouspasparagus]

If you would vote for Nixon over Humphrey, then you 1) didn't know anything about Humphrey and 2) spent the decades of the 60's and 70's stoned.


Much as this last Pres election gave us Obama over John McCain.  Ford was a Great President, perhaps with all caps in great...  (He vetoed more spending bills than any other in the history of the world.)  But the country just couldn't get past the bad taste in their collective mouth from Tricky.

Your mileage would not have gone down because of the speed limit, it would have been due to the internal construction (gearing) of the car.  And there was no GM, Ford, or Chrysler vehicle that had that happen given the THD350 and the Ford C4 and C6 tranny and the crappy old Chrysler of the time....There were no readily available passenger car overdrives available at that time that may have been inflicted.  Urban myth coupled with "rose colored glasses" memories.

Plus no one drove 55 anyway.  (DOT found 85 to 90% NON compliance with the law in the 80's)

Speed doesn't kill.  Suddenly becoming stationary kills.

[Red Arrow]

Heir.
I didn't spend the 60s and 70s stoned or maybe I would have voted for Humphrey.  You and I will just have to disagree on this.

I did actually drive between 55 and 60 during the era of the 55 mph speed limit.   The gearing etc of the cars I had allowed for the best gas mileage, about 17 mpg at 65 mph on the Interstate type highways.  The same trips from Norfolk VA to Philadelphia PA wound up giving about 15 mpg at 55 mph speed limits.  Another family car from "back east" almost never got more than 12 mph, including 120 mile trips of predominately 55 and 60 mph speed limits.  When the family moved to OK in 1971, the car started getting 15 to 17 mpg on the 70 mph Interstates.  Call it what you want, when the speed limit got lowered, I drove slower, and burned more gasoline. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

I would love to know what kind of cars they were!  If you share that, I am going to go find one to buy and drive.  Given my generally anarchistic nature, I love the possibility of breaking the laws of physics!  Perpetual motion is another one of my favorites.